Amazinz wrote:From one perspective (mine) ID is the marriage between creationism and evolution.

not an uncommon viewpiont, i would think. but if so, then all the more reason to not make it part of a science class since it has a distinctly religious component.

ID only has a religious component if you choose to interpret it that way. There may be valid reasons to keep ID out of the classroom but the manner in which I rationalize my spirituality is not one of them. I included evolution in my beliefs as well and it didn't diminish its value any.

Maine has a good swing for a pitcher but on anything that moves, he has no chance. And if it's a fastball, it has to be up in the zone. Basically, the pitcher has to hit his bat. - Mike Pelfrey

Coppermine wrote:Most people have been told since they were kids that Darwin and evolution are the biggest threats to Christianity, and that is not on irresponsible and ignorant, but also sets up the next generation for the same ignorance.

Most modern Christians (that I know at any rate) do not go around denouncing Darwinism as a threat to Christianity.

You're lucky then because if you want to talk "mosts" then most people denounce evolution, 100%.

Fortunately, here in the FBC, were graced with some very intellgent people... most of us bring a different perspective to the table, but no one here is offering up any true ignorance... believe me, it's out there and it's pervasive.

I think this discussion is going well though, everyone's making excellent points. The only thing I wanted to point out was that evolution and common ancestry is a fact... the suggestion that creationism and evolution could possibly be a joint progression towards our species is reasonable and could very well be true.

However, the ID debate in Dover was to offer ID as an ALTERNATIVE theory to evolution and to also announce, in class, that evolution is a theory and therefore has not been proven. THAT is ignorance.

I'll say it again and again, the principles of ID are noble and understandable from most their intelligent proponents points of view...and there are some extremely intelligent ID proponents. Unfortunately, most are not, but it speaks volumes that the citizens of Dover voted out 8 out of 9 school board members who supported teaching ID.

Over and over and over though, Intelligent Design is not, in any way, a scientific explanation for anything... it is faith, whether or not it's disguised as being non-denominational.

Interesting note, in the book "Of Pandas and People" the pro-ID book that the Dover school board wanted all of their students to read, waas simply re-printed with a find-and-replace where Intelligent Design replaced all instances of Creationism.

Also, an openly Christian science teacher in the Dover school risked his job by refusing to read the statement to students about Intelligent Design and the school board threatened to fire him. When asked why he wouldn't read it, even as a believer in creationism, he said "It ain't science."